Nasdaq correction explained: 3 key points every investor must know
Nasdaq correction explained: 3 key points every investor must know
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Nasdaq to open second headquarters in Texas
Exchange operator Nasdaq, long known for its Times Square location, said it would open a regional headquarters in Dallas. It's the latest sign that Texas is fast emerging as a major financial hub, rivaling New York.
The Nasdaq, along with the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average, roared higher over the past two years, delivering double-digit annual gains. And the momentum continued into this year as investors piled into high-growth companies involved in hot technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing — until recently.
Over the past few weeks, a drop in consumer confidence in February and a weaker-than-expected jobs report fueled uncertainty about the economy and the potential effect on corporate earnings. And investors also worried about the impact of certain moves from President Trump — for example, the launch of tariffs on imports from Mexico, Canada and China. Trump introduced the tariffs early last week, though he delayed them by one month on items covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
As a result, some of the strongest growth stocks, from Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) to Amazon, have seen their shares tumble and last week dragged the tech-heavy Nasdaq into correction territory. This downturn may make you wonder whether you really should be buying stocks right now. Before deciding, though, here are three things every investor should know about the Nasdaq correction.
1. Corrections don't necessarily mean a bigger drop is ahead.
The Nasdaq entered a correction on March 6, falling more than 10% from a peak on Dec. 16, though it showed signs of recovery during the next trading session, ending the week down by 9.8% from that point. (For an index to be considered in correction territory, it must fall by 10% to 20% from its most recent high.)
It's too early to say whether this correction period will last, but here's a positive point to keep in mind: History shows us that corrections generally have led to positive performance. Of 11 Nasdaq corrections since 2010, 10 have resulted in positive performance in the 12 months to follow, and the average annual gain has been more than 21%. Of course, history doesn't always repeat itself, but at least this trend shows us corrections don't necessarily mean a bigger drop is just ahead.
2. Today is an excellent time for bargain hunting.
No investors like seeing stocks in their portfolio tumble. But there is one positive point about a market correction, and that's the opportunity to add to some of your favorite positions, potentially for a bargain — and find new buying opportunities, too.
Though we all loved seeing stocks soar in recent times, the downside was that valuations of many players took off, too. We can use prices of S&P 500 stocks as an example, and one of the best ways to do this is by looking at the Shiller CAPE ratio. This metric considers stock prices and earnings per share over a 10-year period to adjust for fluctuations in the economy.
As the bull market roared higher, this measure reached the level of 37, something it's done only twice before since the launch of the benchmark as a 500-company index in the late 1950s. Though it still is high at the level of 35 today, it has started to come down.
And this happens as many stocks, including Nasdaq players such as Nvidia and Amazon, drift into bargain territory as part of the current market declines. Nvidia now trades for 25 times forward earnings estimates, down from 48 earlier this year. And Amazon now trades for 31 times forward estimates, compared with 45 just a few months ago. So now looks like a great time to go bargain hunting.
3. Increase your chances of winning by focusing on the long term.
Okay, so I know it's hard to just ignore what's going on at the moment, especially if your portfolio is suffering. But at times like this, it's important to shift your focus from today to the long term. If you look at stock performance from this perspective, you'll notice that indexes always have recovered after tough periods and gone on to advance, as we can see in this chart of the Nasdaq's performance since 2010 — the time of the first correction I mentioned earlier.
In fact, each correction looks small from this lens, suggesting that if you invest in quality companies or related assets such as exchange-traded funds, these tough times probably won't affect your returns by much at all. By long term, I mean holding on for at least five years, but even better if the stocks you select make great holdings for 10 years or longer.
That's why it's crucial to go for companies with solid long-term prospects that won't be significantly hurt during times of economic headwinds and tough markets. If you do this, you'll sleep a lot easier during market corrections, feel better about scooping up those bargains I talked about, and potentially set yourself up for a long-term win.
John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Adria Cimino has positions in Amazon. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY.
Don't miss this second chance at a potentially lucrative opportunity
Offer from the Motley Fool: Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this.
On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves:
Nvidia:if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009,you'd have $292,207!*
Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $45,326!*
Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $480,568!*
Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
19 minutes ago
- Business Insider
'Economic heart attack': 3 top experts detail how they see a possible US debt crisis unfolding
Investor concerns over a swelling government debt load were soothed last week. But some experts say the US isn't out of the woods yet. Goldman Sachs spoke to three top economic experts — Ray Dalio, Ken Rogoff, and Niall Ferguson — about rising debt levels in the US. All three said they were worried about an impending debt crisis, particularly when considering the effects of President Donald Trump's GOP tax and spending bill, which has been estimated to add trillions to the budget deficit over the next decade. That reflects a slightly more pessimistic view than the market. After a scare last month, demand for long-dated government bonds was strong this week. It was a sign that investors are feeling more comfortable about the fiscal situation in the US, after showing nerves last month after Moody's downgraded US debt and Trump's tax bill began making its way through Congress. Here are the top points each of the experts had to make: Ray Dalio, Bridgewater Associates founder The billionaire hedge fund manager said he sees three factors determining the outlook for the US debt. How much the government pays on debt interest relative to its revenue. If interest payments keep rising, it can "unacceptably" prevent the government from spending money on other things. How much debt the government needs to sell relative to demand. If the government needs to sell more Treasurys than people are willing to buy, interest rates will have to rise. That provides a more attractive yield to investors to hold onto the US debt, but high rates also hurt markets and the economy. How much money the central bank needs to print in other to purchase the remaining debt. If demand for US Treasurys is especially weak, the Fed can step in to purchase bonds to keep the government funded. If it has to print more money to do so, that can raise inflation and ding the value of the US dollar. "One can easily measure these signs of deterioration and see movement toward an impending debt crisis," Dalio, who has long warned of troubling debt dynamics in the US, said. "Such a crisis occurs when the constriction of debt-financed spending happens, like a debt-induced economic heart attack." To prevent a crisis, Dalio said he believed the government should reduce the budget deficit to 3% of GDP. Reducing the debt could cause interest rates to decline around 150 basis points, he estimated, reducing interest payments on the national debt and stimulating the economy. Ken Rogoff, Harvard professor and former IMF chief economist Given Trump's current agenda, Rogoff thinks the US will likely enter a debt crisis within the next four to five years. That's faster than the five- to seven-year timeline he predicted prior to Trump's reelection. "The notion that debt is a free lunch that had been pushed by many economy-watchers is absurd," Rogoff said. "Today's larger deficit on top of already-high debt levels is setting up for a crisis that will necessitate a significant adjustment." Rogoff thinks a debt crisis could play out in two ways: Inflation spikes and results in an economic shock. "Exactly what that shock will look like is difficult to say, but it will likely be more painful than the Covid inflation shock that precipitated only relatively minor adjustments in bond markets," Rogoff said. The government could manage the debt by keeping interest rates artificially low and restricting capital flows. But those measures will hurt economic growth and essentially serve as a tax on savers in the economy, he said. Investors have long been concerned about the US debt, but the outlook is especially worrying now because long-term interest rates are going through a "normalization" from low levels that stretched over the past decade, Rogoff said. "People need to recognize that higher interest rates are here to stay and that a return to the low-rate era of the past might well prove wishful thinking," he added. Niall Ferguson, historian and Harvard researcher Ferguson thinks a crisis could be triggered by a military challenge that results in the US losing its position as a global power, as it goes deeper into debt. The British-American financial historian said his favorite gauge to determine how unsustainable national debt was is when a country spends more on interest payments for its debt than on defense. That rule, which he calls "Ferguson's Law," now applies to the US, which spent $1.1 trillion on interest payments on the national debt over the 2024 fiscal year, according to the Treasury Department. It was more than the $883.7 billion approved that year for total defense spending. Nearly every nation that has violated Ferguson's Law has lost its status as " great power" in financial markets, he said. "Any great power that pursues a reckless fiscal policy by allowing the cost of its debt to exceed the cost of its armed services is opening itself up to challenge," Ferguson said. "The US is just the latest great power to find itself in this fiscal jam." The US has been able to borrow as much as it has through now with no issues, in part because the US dollar remains the world's reserve currency and investors still see Treasurys as " risk-free," Ferguson said, meaning they have faith in the US's ability to make good on its interest payments. But that already appears to be shifting, he said, pointing to investors around the world shedding their exposure to US Treasurys and moving away from dollar assets. "I've warned the US is on an unsustainable fiscal path for 20 years now, and so at times have felt like the boy who cried 'wolf,'" Ferguson added.
New York Times
32 minutes ago
- New York Times
This Vermont Town Loves Its Canadian Neighbors. Trump Made Things Complicated.
On the front porch of her tidy yellow house on Canusa Street — so named because it runs along the border with Canada in tiny Beebe Plain, Vt. — Jan Beadle recently removed the American flag and hung a Canadian one in its place. Ms. Beadle, who has lived along the border for 71 years, hoped that the red maple leaf rippling in the breeze would send a message to her neighbors in the country across the way: I stand with you. And I'm sorry. 'I do feel like it reflects on me, somehow,' she said of President Trump's frequent jabs at Canada, including his imposition of steep new tariffs and his talk of making it the 51st state. 'As a kid, my family went to church in Canada. I went to the movie theater there, and to a youth club. We were just a group of kids together. We weren't labeled as Canadian or American.' The economic impact of Mr. Trump's trade war with Canada is already palpable on both sides of the border. Economic data shows a steep drop-off in spending by Canadians at Vermont hotels and restaurants; normally, 750,000 Canadian visitors spend $150 million in the state each year. Governors of New England states plan to meet on Monday in Boston with leaders from five Canadian provinces to strategize about the strain in their trade relations. But in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont, where many towns and villages sit close by the border, residents also fear the loss of a kinship that has run deep for as long as they can remember. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
32 minutes ago
- New York Times
After Decades of Atrophy, Canada Vows to Beef Up Its Military. Can It Deliver?
At the end of World War II, Canada boasted one of the world's largest navies, with 95,000 uniformed members and 434 ships. The current Royal Canadian Navy is far less impressive — about 11,500 members and 40 vessels. Only one of its four diesel submarines, which were bought secondhand from Britain in the 1990s, is operational. And Canada's armed forces as a whole are about 16,000 people short of an approved head count of 101,500, including reserves. Prime Minister Mark Carney, seeking to reverse what he characterized as the atrophying of Canada's military, is directing billions of dollars to the armed forces, with the goal of reaching a NATO spending commitment this year, seven years ahead of schedule. And while the move comes after repeated claims by President Trump that Canada was effectively sponging off the United States to ensure its defense, Mr. Carney also cast the spending as part of his effort to loosen Canada's ties with its neighbor after Mr. Trump's repeated comments about making it the 51st state. Many of Canada's allies in Europe, including Britain and Germany, are also expanding their militaries in the face of Mr. Trump's isolationism. Mr. Carney has yet to say where the 9.3 billion Canadian dollars, about $6.8 billion, he has added to the defense budget will come from. Many people also question whether the armed forces will be able to actually spend that extra money so quickly. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
